This message was self-deleted by its author

[kristopher]

191. If it isn't about him then what's at the root of your vile behavior?

Non-apology apology
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A non-apology apology or nonpology is a statement that has the form of an apology but does not express the expected contrition. It is common in both politics and public relations. It most commonly entails the speaker saying that he or she is sorry not for a behavior, statement or misdeed, but rather is sorry only because a person who has been aggrieved is requesting the apology, expressing a grievance, or is threatening some form of retribution or retaliation.

An example of a non-apology apology would be saying "I'm sorry that you feel that way" to someone who has been offended by a statement. This apology does not admit that there was anything wrong with the remarks made, and additionally, it may be taken as insinuating that the person taking offense was excessively thin-skinned or irrational in taking offense at the remarks in the first place. Another form of non-apology is one which does not apologize directly to the person who was injured or insulted, but instead offers a generic apology "to anyone who might have been offended."[1]

Statements that use the word "sorry" but do not express responsibility for wrongdoing may be meaningful expressions of regret, but such statements can also be used to elicit forgiveness without acknowledging fault.[2]

<snip>

As a tactic[edit]
Typologies of apology note that apologies cover a range of situations and degrees of regret, remorse, and contrition, and that success is to be gauged by the result of the apology rather than the degree of contrition involved. Deborah Levi offers the following possibilities:

Tactical apology—when a person accused of wrongdoing offers an apology that is rhetorical and strategic—and not necessary heartfelt
Explanation apology—when a person accused of wrongdoing offers an apology that is merely a gesture that is meant to counter an accusation of wrongdoing. In fact, it may be used to defend the actions of the accused
Formalistic apology—when a person accused of wrongdoing offers an apology after being admonished to do so by an authority figure—who may also be the individual who suffered the wrongdoing
Happy ending apology—when a person accused of wrongdoing fully acknowledges responsibility for the wrongdoing and is genuinely remorseful
Pretty Girl Trick—"With great privilege comes an equally great ability to be irresponsible and yet succeed, be cared about, get out of jail free (...) “Sorry” is always saying “please still like me.” Doing better is more like deserving it."

While the non-apology apology is clearly unsuited to situations where an expression of remorse, contrition, and future change are obviously desirable (e.g. the "happy ending" apology), it may prove extremely useful in situations where little can be done to assuage the apparent offence or prevent its repetition, as when an airline apologises for a delay, in the full knowledge that a future repetition is inevitable. Such tactical apologies may have beneficial effects simply through the validation of the emotions of the offended party: they answer the basic human need for disagreeable emotions to be recognised and acknowledged as important, while protecting the apparently offending party from an expression of remorse.[20] Negotiators often use this tactic to calm tense situations: "an apology can defuse emotions effectively, even when you do not acknowledge personal responsibility for the action or admit an intention to harm. An apology may be one of the least costly and most rewarding investments you can make."[21]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology